3 ms·

> no one is really against some Rust in some parts of the kernel This drama included the dma maintainer saying he is categorically opposed to any Rust in any p

> no one is really against some Rust in some parts of the kernel This drama included the dma maintainer saying he is categorically opposed to any Rust in any part of the kernel.

arp242 2y ago
Where? Because "keep the wrappers in your code" and "do that in your driver so that you have to do it instead of spreading this" doesn't sound like that.
- derhuerst 2y ago
  This [0] seems to be the closest to your parent's statement: > The common ground is that I have absolutely no interest in helping to spread a multi-language code base. I absolutely support using Rust in new codebase, but I do not at all in Linux. [0] https://lwn.net/ml/all/20250204052916.GA28741@lst.de/ https://lwn.net/ml/all/20250204052916.GA28741@lst.de/
  - Pet_Ant 2y ago
    He needs really to be removed from the process. He may be useful for now but for long term he is an impediment. C is the 1970’s. Sure it’s proven itself… but so had Assembly when Unix was invented.
    - account42 2y ago
      This kind of zealotry is not going to convince people over to accept Rust into their projects.
- cycomanic 2y ago
  He said explicitely: >Every additional bit that another language creeps in drastically reduces the maintainability of the kernel as an integrated project. The only reason Linux managed to survive so long is by not having internal boundaries, and adding another language completely breaks this. You might not like my answer, but I will do everything I can do to stop this. I think that clearly means he is out to sabotage any other language than C making it into Linux.
  - gpm 2y ago
    The end of the paragraph also emphasized the point > I do not want it anywhere near a huge C code base that I need to maintain. Link to mailing list: https://lwn.net/ml/all/20250131075751.GA16720@lst.de/ https://lwn.net/ml/all/20250131075751.GA16720@lst.de/ This was also on a patch that did "keep the wrappers in [rust-folder, not DMA] code". Arp242's interpretation isn't just belied by the direct words of the maintainer, it's belied by the fact that the code the maintainer rejected was exactly what Arp242 is suggesting the maintainer was asking for.
  - IncreasePosts 2y ago
    I wouldn't call being vocally against something "sabotage". Would it be reasonable if that person said anyone trying to get rust integrated is sabotaging the Linux kernel?
    - tsimionescu 2y ago
      You're conflating two things. The fact that he voices his belief that Rust is harmful for kernel development is fair. The fact that he is using his powers as maintainer of the DMA module to prevent Rust code from being added, with the explicit goal of making it harder to develop Rust drivers so that maybe the Rust-for-Linux project might get abandoned is an explicit act of sabotage against the R4L project (no one is saying he is sabotaging the Linux project itself). In contrast, even accepting the "two languages bad" perspective, you can't call the R4L project "sabotage" in the same way, because they are clearly not intending to prevent or break anything in the Linux kernel, even if you think they will end up doing so as this maintainer does.
      - snvzz 2y ago
        >The fact that he is using his powers as maintainer of the DMA module to prevent Rust code from being added This is a misinterpretation of the facts. It's not actually up to Hellwig whether or not the patch gets accepted; the relevant maintainer that would merge the patch is somebody else. He's totally within his right to express his opinion in a NACK.
buttercraft 2y ago
Are you referring to Hellwig saying, "No rust code in kernel/dma, please."? I took that to mean just dma.
- rst 2y ago
  The objection was to a separate file entirely outside of his subtree, describing its interface, which is apparently supposed to be duplicated instead in each rust driver that references it, for no clear reason -- other than his stated reason of not wanting to see languages other than C in the kernel at all.
- steveklabnik 2y ago
  I was referring to the statements provided by the children of this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42978746 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42978746 (they were made at roughly the same time you posted this, so you wouldn't have seen them then)
  - buttercraft 2y ago
    Ah, sorry. I see it now.
    - steveklabnik 2y ago
      No need to be sorry, you're all good!

> no one is really against some Rust in some parts of the kernel This drama included the dma maintainer saying he is categorically opposed to any Rust in any part of the kernel.

arp242 2y ago

Where? Because "keep the wrappers in your code" and "do that in your driver so that you have to do it instead of spreading this" doesn't sound like that.

derhuerst 2y ago
This [0] seems to be the closest to your parent's statement: > The common ground is that I have absolutely no interest in helping to spread a multi-language code base. I absolutely support using Rust in new codebase, but I do not at all in Linux. [0] https://lwn.net/ml/all/20250204052916.GA28741@lst.de/ https://lwn.net/ml/all/20250204052916.GA28741@lst.de/
- Pet_Ant 2y ago
  He needs really to be removed from the process. He may be useful for now but for long term he is an impediment. C is the 1970’s. Sure it’s proven itself… but so had Assembly when Unix was invented.
  - account42 2y ago
    This kind of zealotry is not going to convince people over to accept Rust into their projects.
cycomanic 2y ago
He said explicitely: >Every additional bit that another language creeps in drastically reduces the maintainability of the kernel as an integrated project. The only reason Linux managed to survive so long is by not having internal boundaries, and adding another language completely breaks this. You might not like my answer, but I will do everything I can do to stop this. I think that clearly means he is out to sabotage any other language than C making it into Linux.
- gpm 2y ago
  The end of the paragraph also emphasized the point > I do not want it anywhere near a huge C code base that I need to maintain. Link to mailing list: https://lwn.net/ml/all/20250131075751.GA16720@lst.de/ https://lwn.net/ml/all/20250131075751.GA16720@lst.de/ This was also on a patch that did "keep the wrappers in [rust-folder, not DMA] code". Arp242's interpretation isn't just belied by the direct words of the maintainer, it's belied by the fact that the code the maintainer rejected was exactly what Arp242 is suggesting the maintainer was asking for.
- IncreasePosts 2y ago
  I wouldn't call being vocally against something "sabotage". Would it be reasonable if that person said anyone trying to get rust integrated is sabotaging the Linux kernel?
  - tsimionescu 2y ago
    You're conflating two things. The fact that he voices his belief that Rust is harmful for kernel development is fair. The fact that he is using his powers as maintainer of the DMA module to prevent Rust code from being added, with the explicit goal of making it harder to develop Rust drivers so that maybe the Rust-for-Linux project might get abandoned is an explicit act of sabotage against the R4L project (no one is saying he is sabotaging the Linux project itself). In contrast, even accepting the "two languages bad" perspective, you can't call the R4L project "sabotage" in the same way, because they are clearly not intending to prevent or break anything in the Linux kernel, even if you think they will end up doing so as this maintainer does.
    - snvzz 2y ago
      >The fact that he is using his powers as maintainer of the DMA module to prevent Rust code from being added This is a misinterpretation of the facts. It's not actually up to Hellwig whether or not the patch gets accepted; the relevant maintainer that would merge the patch is somebody else. He's totally within his right to express his opinion in a NACK.

buttercraft 2y ago

Are you referring to Hellwig saying, "No rust code in kernel/dma, please."? I took that to mean just dma.

rst 2y ago
The objection was to a separate file entirely outside of his subtree, describing its interface, which is apparently supposed to be duplicated instead in each rust driver that references it, for no clear reason -- other than his stated reason of not wanting to see languages other than C in the kernel at all.
steveklabnik 2y ago
I was referring to the statements provided by the children of this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42978746 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42978746 (they were made at roughly the same time you posted this, so you wouldn't have seen them then)
- buttercraft 2y ago
  Ah, sorry. I see it now.
  - steveklabnik 2y ago
    No need to be sorry, you're all good!